Q1.
Part 1. Chapter 2
You say that your Objective is to look after the local character of a place, which includes preserving Natural Space. (Point I) This will not be sustainable if present plans go ahead.
The areas suggested are Green Field Sites (i.e. the High Weald Natural Landscape) and not Brown Field Sites.
Q1
Part 1 Chapter 2
There seems to be no regard to the local village life + surrounding scenery, used by dog walkers, runners; shooting pheasants etc; the footpath to the Church; the footpath from School Lane to Jempson’s; recreation ground etc.
The surrounding fields have been used by Tenant Farmers for years, and supply local produce and are helping maintain the natural habitat for many species of flora + fauna important for biodiversity & ecosystems.
Peasmarsh fields have natural springs that erupt from the ground and cause flooded fields and gardens, frequently.
At the back of Farleys Way there is a stream or pond that has a culvert and mustn't be blocked. The flooding caused is neither “neutral nor minor positive.”
Q5
Part 2 Chapter 4 – Infrastructure Needs
A priority should be to re-check infrastructure needs!
The risk of flooding, as stated above, needs re‑assessing.
Our utilities are outdated. The pumping station is inadequate & drains are frequently blocked.
There are 2 mature oak trees in Farley’s Way which in Autumn cause the drains to overflow because of leaves. Water often flows down the road and floods across it + the gardens, as there aren't enough drains.
We often get power cuts & frequent outages, causing problems with wifi, phone lines, water supply, gas + electricity supplies! As a vulnerable person I have to depend on water being delivered. There is no 999 availability + quite a few stopcocks (PE1 + PE2 in the road have failed.)
The position up the top of the hill + the number of houses suggested will put extra pressure on the Dickensian infrastructure that can't cope already!
Parking is often a problem with cars parking on pavements, restricting emergency services.
If PE5 development goes ahead, this will increase the problem.
Q6
Part 3 ch 5 – Preparing the Development Strategy
Access to School Lane is unsafe. It is too narrow and causes congestion. Development onto the road will be too dangerous – a child has already been hit recently. The Neighbourhood Original Plan Boundary was acceptable, however, the updated one is NOT.
Q13 (+47)
Proposed Vision + Development Strategy
There is a disproportionate requirement for certain areas, considering size + facilities.
Rye town – 325 houses (many shops etc)
Beckley (no shops one pub) – 53 houses
Peasmarsh (ONE shop and petrol, closed on Sundays) – 143 houses!
Q47
Peasmarsh Proposed Site Allocations
Part 3 ch 5
PE5 – Loss of Community Space + Facilities.
The Maltings Business Park supports local people. The community recreation ground field, which is used for sport + various events, will be lost and the loss of the community car park will add to congestion.
PE1 – PE2. Suggested road functions will be extremely dangerous! The one at the top of the hill, near The Cockerel, especially so. Cars travel too fast + often the sunlight blocks visibility on its approach, going up the hill.
Peasmarsh village itself has a 2‑hourly bus service that is often delayed or cancelled.
Jempson’s entry from roundabout is often flooded + impassable! The facilities there sound good but it is ONE SHOP, reliant on one man of retirement age, not 5 different shops!
Doctors: The nearest doctor is in Rye.
School: The primary + nursery school is small + old.
Q69
Part 3 ch 7 – Other Comments
I know the Government is committed to building more houses but why are they not using Brown Field Sites + repurposing empty houses/flats owned by companies & falling into disrepair?
We are one of the worst countries for biodiversity – our natural environment and wildlife is declining. We should be maintaining hedge rows + natural habitat. Severe weather will get worse. We need to encourage LOCAL farming & not rely on foreign imports.
Should you require further space to respond to make comments please continue on a separate page or sheet of paper as necessary. The owner of these fields is only interested in financial gain.
The builders promise things that they then don’t do i.e., after getting planning permission they then changed the amount of social housing in preference to bigger houses!
We live in windy roads + lanes + depend on cars.
Please rethink your policies.

This is a most difficult form to fill in!
I can only respond to proposals regarding Peasmarsh.
School will become very busy with the additional houses. Also the school is limited and will it be able to accept any more pupils? Should another school be built?
The drainage on the land is also a problem and also the sewage.
With an enlarged community we will need a surgery. Possibly a care home for the older residents.
Additional traffic will spoil our quiet country lanes.

Hello I'm afraid i'm not replying to andy of the questions. proposed as I haven't been able to figure out the questrial are of the proposeds. I found It really hard to figure out. SO - I'm just going to.
So much rubbish lying around in hellgrows Roads- woods and Helds We need as pany trees and green spaces as we can get . Nature Isn't something that happens outside. We are all a part of It We are animals-But the. Most dangerouse animal of THIS place called all. Peaswarst IS Not made for 143 Houses It's simple
write down thoughts-points - desparate replys First of all this Isso distructive to the community and environment. if a horrible money making proposal this Is a village the idea that these houses will be built for local people to buy Is also hugely questionable. affordability ! pot holes Flooding abuse of green spaces.
Who thought up. this number of 143/1 06 Builders will not care about where they builted sounds like the council don't care. It's Just about hitting this target this terrible government have thought up. a poster outside there IS Jempsons saying "fleratage-values" TRUST " Then next TO IT IS THIS Hidrase poster regarding this abusive proposal. IRONIC 1 127 6 00
ALSO - how about all those homes !! that are being kept empty. for holiday homes. air DAD'S /So many of These are in Rue. kepped for the summer. tourist trade - And second. nomes also around here .. All the new built hauses I have seen, Apple dance etc are huge 3 - 4 Bedrooms There is a reason why its called the country sie It needs preserving TRAFFIC IN PeasMARSHY. Is already terrible too Many COURS-LORRys- vans and driving to fast -
All roads are to narrow. for any more traffic while I understand the neep WWW . affordable housing for all people everything costs so much money things need to be thought out properly Build houses in a place with proper. Infrastructure. The only way anything will work in this village will be MURCH. fewer houses built in the centre of the village. But there's NOTHING That makes sense -

Qu.47 PE 1
70 new houses in addition to the 47. 40+ houses that are proposed in PE2 that shares a boundary will, no doubt, cause more surface water flooding until the urgent need for taking this water across the A268 is addressed. Rainwater run-oft from this will join the watercourse at Tanhouse lane, where the outflow is already causing flooding during rainfall as the outlet pipe under the A268 is too small. The other major concern has to be the foul water system that is already at exceeding capacity.

The issue of combined Sewer System really impacts this problem in Peasmarsh. This results in the surplus capacity
being released numerous occasions by Southern water into the local stream that flows to the River Rother.
As part of the Peasmarsh NDP it was the wish of residents
that only smaller developments would be accepted. What was the point of hundreds of hours of work to produce this plan, if it is already being disregarded!

I note now 45 proposed new dwellings (PE2) after the application on 14/08/23 was for 41 houses as deemed maximum. The Peasmarsh NDP did not include this, as it had been in the Planning system already. For all of the above reasons (PE1) this can and should only be done if the water problems are properly addressed.

Surely 15 affordable housing units in Peasmarsh (PE3) is a dream. The lack of available builders that could actually manage to cost -effectively achieve this is a massive problem. There is no doubt that any further development of this site would in the future, lead to applications for the whole site of Tanyards to be built on The infrastuucture in our village cannot support this and the access to the site is difficult.
Although I am the owner of this proposed site (PE4), I would like to say that this was the only site that was given an allocated site in the Peasmarsh Neighbourhood Development Plan. We offered this site after being asked to, as a result of the overwhelming wish of the village for small developments.
This seems to be the best chance of affordable flats in Peasmarsh (PE5) but must keep the business units below them as employment in the village needs to be protected and encouraged.

Qu.5 Health & social care NHS - surgeries in Rye are no longer accepting new NHS dental patients. The wait for an appointment is 6 months + Planning was refused open
permission was sought to build care home next o Rye Medical centre on the grounds that the practice could not take on any more patients.

Qu.47. Dark Skies Policy
Lighting should be designed to minimise light spill in communal areas. How will control be exercised within the boundaries of each property X 144 ?

Qu.69 Drainage is a major issue where Tanhouse Lane meets the Jempson's roundabout. It is understood that the
pumping Station at Iden is already at full capacity.

Qu.47 PE 5 Malthouse Business Park used by small local firms. Employing Local people Removal of these premises would be detrimental to the Establishment of small businesses within the village which give employment to local people. The car parking is utilised by users of the playing field, the loss of which would create further parking issues in nearby streets.
Qu.5 The sewage system cannot cope with the current level of housing at Peasmarsh. Any further development will only exacerbate the problems. There Should be no further developments in Peasmarsh until the sewage infrastructure is vastly improved.
Poor Road Surface, when raining heavy flooding of Roads due to blocked drains, not only on main roads but surrounding lanes as well. some have been blocked for years. This leads to many potholes being formed throughout winter.
Qu.47 PE 3 Tanyard Field
This site has already been recognised as a totally unsuitable Site for development, This decision was accepted by RDC in 2024. The whole site is FULL of natural Springs which EVEN now causes Problems with Surface water running off to the properties bordering the site.
PE 4 Orchard way.
Flooding occurs when there is heavy rain. A drainage ditch drains into the small pond on site which then flows into a small drainage pipe. In times of heavy rain this cannot cope with draining the Water away and flooding
occurs. There is only a narrow limited access to site via a privately owned road. There is no main drainage available on this site.

Qu.47 PE 5 Malthouse Business Park used by small local firms. Employing Local people Removal of these premises would be detrimental to the Establishment of small businesses within the village which give employment to local people. The car parking is utilised by users of the playing field, the loss of which would create further parking issues in nearby streets.
Qu.5 The sewage system cannot cope with the current level of housing at Peasmarsh. Any further development will only exacerbate the problems. There Should be no further developments in Peasmarsh until the sewage infrastructure is vastly improved.
Poor Road Surface, when raining heavy flooding of Roads due to blocked drains, not only on main roads but surrounding lanes as well. some have been blocked for years. This leads to many potholes being formed throughout winter.
Qu.47 PE 3 Tanyard Field
This site has already been recognised as a totally unsuitable Site for development, This decision was accepted by RDC in 2024. The whole site is FULL of natural Springs which EVEN now causes Problems with Surface water running off to the properties bordering the site.
PE 4 Orchard way.
Flooding occurs when there is heavy rain. A drainage ditch drains into the small pond on site which then flows into a small drainage pipe. In times of heavy rain this cannot cope with draining the Water away and flooding
occurs. There is only a narrow limited access to site via a privately owned road. There is no main drainage available on this site.

Qu.47 PE 5 Malthouse Business Park used by small local firms. Employing Local people Removal of these premises would be detrimental to the Establishment of small businesses within the village which give employment to local people. The car parking is utilised by users of the playing field, the loss of which would create further parking issues in nearby streets.
Qu.5 The sewage system cannot cope with the current level of housing at Peasmarsh. Any further development will only exacerbate the problems. There Should be no further developments in Peasmarsh until the sewage infrastructure is vastly improved.
Poor Road Surface, when raining heavy flooding of Roads due to blocked drains, not only on main roads but surrounding lanes as well. some have been blocked for years. This leads to many potholes being formed throughout winter.
Qu.47 PE 3 Tanyard Field
This site has already been recognised as a totally unsuitable Site for development, This decision was accepted by RDC in 2024. The whole site is FULL of natural Springs which EVEN now causes Problems with Surface water running off to the properties bordering the site.
PE 4 Orchard way.
Flooding occurs when there is heavy rain. A drainage ditch drains into the small pond on site which then flows into a small drainage pipe. In times of heavy rain this cannot cope with draining the Water away and flooding
occurs. There is only a narrow limited access to site via a privately owned road. There is no main drainage available on this site.

Question 1

There are so many justifications as to why the building of 143 houses should not be developed in Peasmarsh – but mainly –
To build on cherished Green Belt and on “marsh land”. The reason why Peasmarsh is called Peasmarsh.
The area is well known for excess surface water.

Question 5

What are the plans for increased services to Peasmarsh?
Public transport is already limited and recently the 313 bus route was publicised by Rother Council as ceasing to run on Sundays!
Health care, schools and utilities — are these services to expand?
South East Water has claimed it cannot manage increased demand especially during hot summer months.
Are the developers prepared & promised to support the added population of Peasmarsh?
Flooding is a huge worry — how are residents supposed to insure properties after water damage?
How many times will an insurance company insure a household?
Will the Council promise support?!
Approximately 3 years ago, development of Peasmarsh was argued against any further building.
The arguments were very detailed — why have the previous reasonings been dismissed?
Perhaps the original case against development and all the extensive paperwork should be re‑examined.
Save the Council’s time and money — why not not build in Peasmarsh?
Question 13

The local area of beauty (Rye) have all the same issues with new developments — surface water especially + fragile infrastructure.
Improved utilities should be established first!
Surface water is a huge problem in Peasmarsh — I am a regular walker & witness water laying on the fields.
Tanyard Field has natural springs.
It provides our garden with natural hydration especially during hot summer months.
We never have to water our patch of land — it stays green even through a drought!
New housing would increase threats of flooding.
I have enclosed photos of our garden as evidence of our concerns of the developments planned here in Peasmarsh.
Photos included - Label: Storm Chandra — 27th January 2026

Question 47

I have been a local resident for many years. I and my family very much oppose the plans to build 143 new properties in this village.
There is limited space, limited doctors / dentist appointments now, let alone if these plans for Peasmarsh and surrounding villages go ahead.
The village would lose its identity.
There have been problems with water / drainage issues coming from the fields. I believe the site chosen has a natural spring, so will never be suitable.
The families / children that have grown up here have no opportunity to remain. Previous new builds have given priority to people from outside the village (social housing) while our families and children cannot afford to remain.
This has long been a cherished area with outstanding surroundings. that should be protected, with ancient springs, bat colonies and the wildlife.
This is a peaceful, friendly village that would lose its identity and soul.
My family and I feel very strongly about this issue, as it seems does every Peasmarsh resident. Question 52

My family and I feel very strongly that this whole area, TN31, is a beautiful part of the country that should not have hundreds of new properties built.
(Original text contained wording about new homes being built for a specific group. Rewritten safely:)
We are concerned that large-scale new housing may not primarily serve existing local residents.
Rye Harbour is also a Site of Special Scientific Interest, which has species of birds and wildlife—birds travelling from far away. This also should NOT be disrupted.
We as a family feel very strongly that this country is quickly losing its identity and we want to have a say in what happens.

Q1: The Strategic S.O. should be adhered to in formulating the plan, plan in particular point 11 delivery of sustainable development. Local context & character, in Peasmarsh, there are instances where this principle is clearly breached). The proposals will change the character of the village. The objectives, no mention of area of outstanding natural beauty. National landscape should be added. See chapter 6.2 for details.

Q5: Infrastructure needs. Utility & energy fundamental pre requisites for any development after an inspection in 2024, highlighted the deficiencies of these services. The sewage system is inadequate. The combination of drain arrangement, storm water & sewage, wet conditions, ensures flooding & eruption of sewage onto the roads the sewage pumping station is at its limit of capacity. Further deterioration will make life insanitary currently there are wells that never run dry. Efforts have been made to reduce flooding but have failed. The high water table, have been known for a long time, but no remedies have been proposed power & water supply are clearly inadequate, at this current time without a development. Sometimes water & power failures may last for days. This must be solved now before any possible development. The village school is oversubscribed.

Q6: Development option SDO13 – A21 corridor growth should be pursued. SDO14 should proceed. Large scale developments are technically totally unsuitable.

Q13: The development strategy, it has the hall mark of a paper exercise. It ignores real life & the situation on the ground. The development is out of proportion to the size of the village & would increase the population by 15-20% thus changing the character of the village. Why is the proposed development in excess of any other village including larger ones. Is this to make Peasmarsh a dormitory of Rye? Peasmarsh already has more social & low cost housing housing than any/than many E. Sussex villages. Large scale development is not needed.

Q47: I have objects to the allocation sites in Peasmarsh - PE3 Tanyard Field & PE5 Malthouse Business Park.
PE3. This is not a new site. The landowner has tried to develop this site for 40 years & failed. The site is totally unsuitable for development. The field is in an area of natural beauty. The development would be detrimental to the character & appearance of the landscape. The visual amenity of the village would be damaged. There would be a loss of amenity, privacy & quiet enjoyment. Acceptance of this would encourage other unsuitable applications in the village. The landowners says he wants only 15 dwellings. Then in the future he would apply for further dwellings. A development would impact unfavourably on listed properties. The field has had a historic right of way across it for nearly a 1000 years. The field is not suitable for housing & generate drainage issues. The field has drainage problems, there are 5 natural springs, as noted on maps. There are photos of water spouting from the middle of the field. The soil is heavy clay & water, heavy rain runs off. Causing problems & dam age to the properties lining main street. Development would make this worse. The local authority & southern water is not satisfied that the site can be adequately drained. Surface water run off is a major problem in the village. Clue is in the name Peasmarsh. Many years ago, the landowner said he would plant trees, which split the field into 2. He said this would solve the problem of flooding, to the properties that back onto the field. The planting of the trees, failed to solve the flooding issue.
My property backs onto Tanyard Field. I do not know when but the landowner said he would have a trench/ditch dug to these properties, and he would in future have the ditched cleared of debris, again he has fail to do this. I have cleared the ditch twice in 4 years.
My rear lawn is more like if sponge, when we have heavy rain.
My water meter is in the real lawn. When the meter reading is required, at time the water has to cleared from above the meter, and I have also had to remove wet clay from above the meter, so I could read the meter, because the meter reader did not want to get their hands dirty. Building on this site would make the situation worse.

As local residents we very much oppose the plans to build 143 new properties in this village.
There is limited space, limited doctors & dentists appointments available now, let alone if these plans and those in surrounding villages go ahead.
The village would lose its identity.
There have long been problems with water/drainage coming from the fields mentioned as a possible site.
Also, the families/children that have grown up here have no opportunity to remain.
Previous new builds have given priority to people from outside while our children cannot afford to remain. This has long been a cherished village with beautiful surroundings that should be protected with ancient [protected species] & bat colonies etc.
This is a peaceful friendly village that would lose its identity.
We feel very strongly about this issue as it seems does every Peasmarsh resident. We feel very strongly that this whole area TN31 is a beautiful part of the country that should not have hundreds of new properties built, which we presume very strongly will be built for [redacted].
Rye Harbour especially is a site of special scientific interest with species of birds etc. that travel from far away — this also should not be disrupted.
We feel very strongly that this country is losing its identity and we have no say in what happens.

PART 2 CHAPTER 4
WATER MAINS - CONSTANTLY SEE WATER POURING OUT IN AREAS ROADS IN A DISGRACEFUL CONDITION WITH POTHOLES, REGULAR POWER CUTS, TRANSPORT- POOR BUS SERVICE + BELIEVE COUNCIL ARE CUTTING. SUNDAY SERVICE SO ADEQUATE PARKING FOR MULTI VEHICLE HOUSEHOLDS REQUIRED.

STRUGGLES TO GET DOCTORS APPTS.

NHS DENTISTS ?? WHERE

PART 3 CHAPTER 7, QU.47 PE1- PE5
PARKING - INCREASE ON MAIN ROAD AREAS ARE PRONE TO FLOODING IF NOT ENOUGH ON SITE CAUSING POTENTIAL RISKS IF JOINING ON BROW OF HILL.

LIGHTING - CURRENTLY NO LIGHT POLLUTION ENSURING NOCTURNAL HABITAT ARE NOT DISTURBED, POOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT - NOT MUCH FOR YOUNGSTERS EXCEPT RECREATION GROUND WHICH ALSO HAVE EVENTS - PARKING FOR THIS?

SEWAGE - OLD SYSTEM UNLIKELY TO COPE WITH AMOUNT of HOUSES PROPOSED REDUCTION of SPACE FOR WILDLIFE+ DISTURBANCE.

Qu.69
GENERALLY STOP SECOND HOMES DEVELOPE THE DERECT BUILDINGS THOUSES FOCUS ON THE LACK OF MEDICAL FACILITIES FOR NHS TREATMENT.

Question 47
PEI – PES
AS LOCAL RESIDENTS WE VERY MUCH OPPOSE THE PLANS TO BUILD 143 NEW PROPERTIES IN THIS VILLAGE.
THERE IS LIMITED SPACE, LIMITED DOCTORS / DENTIST APPOINTMENTS AVAILABLE NOW LET ALONE IF THESE PLANS & THOSE OF SURROUNDING VILLAGES GO AHEAD.
THE VILLAGE WOULD I BELIEVE SUFFER AND LOSE ITS IDENTITY.
THERE HAVE LONG BEEN PROBLEMS WITH WATER / DRAINAGE COMING FROM THE FIELDS MENTIONED AS A PROBABLE SITE.
ALSO THE FAMILIES / CHILDREN THAT HAVE GROWN UP HERE HAVE NO OPPORTUNITY TO REMAIN — PREVIOUS NEW BUILDS HAVE GIVEN PRIORITY TO PEOPLE FROM OUTSIDE WHILE OUR CHILDREN CANNOT AFFORD TO REMAIN.
THIS HAS LONG BEEN A CHERISHED VILLAGE WITH BEAUTIFUL SURROUNDINGS HAT SHOULD BE PROTECTED — [PROTECTED SPECIES], BAT COLONIES ETC.
THIS IS A PEACEFUL, FRIENDLY VILLAGE THAT WOULD LOSE ITS IDENTITY AND SOUL.
WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THIS ISSUE AS IT SEEMS DOES EVERY PEASMARSH RESIDENT.
Question 52
FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT THIS WHOLE AREA TN31 IS A BEAUTIFUL PART OF THE COUNTRY THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE 100’s OF NEW PROPERTIES BUILT WHICH WE PRESUME VERY STRONGLY WILL BE BUILT FOR [REDACTED].
RYE HARBOUR ESPECIALLY IS A SITE OF SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC INTEREST WITH SPECIES OF BIRD ETC. THAT TRAVEL FROM FAR AWAY — THIS ALSO SHOULD NOT BE DISRUPTED.
WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT THIS COUNTRY IS LOSING ITS IDENTITY AND WE HAVE NO SAY IN WHAT HAPPENS.

The development strategy is completely undermined by any attempt to address the infrastructure needed to support the plan.
As a tick box plan to meet government and local council targets it has merits, of course it does.
However, the failure to address obvious needs for improved infrastructure specifically—flooding, sewage, more doctors, dentists, schools, transport etc. etc.—makes the plan unfeasible.
Looking at other developments in neighbouring villages and towns it is clear the lack of provision for the necessary infrastructure to support the building plans is the cause of inadequate [unclear word] and [unclear word]. It is visible that developers are not being asked to provide the extra services needed, and they will be needed, so presume the answer will be for local council to provide at expense of taxpayer?
Unfortunately then, the whole plan only proposes to answer half the need for extra housing which is so badly needed.
Without commitment on improving infrastructure I feel the plan is inadequate.
Point 47.
The whole allocation of sites within Peasmarsh is unrealistic without increased services as above.
Is anyone listening…?

1.
I am not sure of the relevance ROTHER Rather’s Local Plan since it will cease to exist in the next few years so question the validity of the proposals contained therein.
2.
I am concerned that the numbers do not reflect local needs and the proposed sites do not appear to meet the needs of local people on limited incomes and I do not agree with these figures as they do not appear to be evidence based.
5.
There is no evidence of any infrastructure being proposed or included in the planning – schools, transport, Dr’s surgeries, traffic flow – just houses in a village that is already in need of transport, Dr surgeries & improved management of traffic flows.
9.
This is a “vision” not a place, and for this reason I would not support as there is no reality check.
13.
For reasons & accuracy of wording point out with reference to 6.76 that there are not pavements on both sides of Main Street running the full length – has anyone actually tried to walk up Main…?
13.
Noted it is a vision and no indications of planning to make this reality.
47.
The site allocations in Peasmarsh do not take into account the long‑standing concerns which have already been well‑documented and evidenced regarding drainage – properties are still not connected to the main sewers and flooding is commonplace and has still not been resolved – the power supply is not reliable and drops in pressure / power cuts are frequent.
The infrastructure cannot support the crushing population. SE Water has evidence of leaks / frequent (issues) so I don’t understand why they are supporting.
The other major concern is the effect on traffic from the increased traffic on to Main Street. The emphasis on walking, cycling and the reduction of the bus service from April means that these policies are now becoming exclusive rather than inclusive – people with disabilities, the elderly & other residents currently are beginning to feel shut in and this has the ongoing effect on their mental wellbeing.
The pedestrian exit on to Main Street is currently in private ownership?!

Question 1 - This strategy does not reflect the wants or need the village. Anti social behavior will increase, no local priority.
Question 5 - Utilities on the village are outdated
The pumping station is constantly blocked
Vehicles are always seen. Back gardens flooded with water.
Question 6 - Land should be personal due to a historic [unclear text] on the land. Boundaries are not marked.
Used by local farmers for years. Utility and school stressed. Unsuitable for all the traffic now.
Wireless/utility infrastructure and School Lane access are already stretched.
The area is under pressure as it is now.
Question 13 - Transport network is inaquete. Schools, doctors, dentists, roads are not enough.
Question 47 - Pot holes dangerous. Accidents have already happened with the houses. Impossible access.
Question 67 - Strongly object. Would impact us as a family who have lived here for many years. It's a natural beauty, with lots of huldeple, owls, wood peckers
foxes, cows, sheep graze here and hay for food

Question 1
The local strategy does not reflect the needs of the village
It has had various planning applications over the years, which have all been turned down as unsuitable
There has been no expansion or modernisation of water/sewage drainage
Question 5
Access to building plots are unsuitable
Heavy recreational area and the party ground plus junction would be a massive safety concern
Anti social behaviour is a big problem now without taking away the small area there is now, as well as it being a valuable community area
Question 6
The field has a natural [unclear text] which should be preserved
Whole local pubs/college flooded due to the field being so wet
School Lane access unsuitable
Ditches were never mounted
Question 13
Transport network is not functional
Schools, doctors and dentist services are over‑stretched
Roads are not marked
Question 47
Water freezing on road causing ice and accidents
Very dangerous at the brow of a hill
Too many houses for the local services
Buses to be cut, not adequate for jobs
Doctors, dentist overcrowded
Traffic calming already needed in areas
Question 67
My family have lived locally for over many yrs
I strongly object to this planning
It would kill off all the meadow
And field is used for animal feed
What is needed to support the local farming community

Part 2
Chapter 4
Travel to secondary school already full & busses missed
Dentist and doctors appointments are hard to get and will be harder to get.
Water issues- blockages, no water, sewage
Will be an eye sore in the Maltings.
47
PEI- PES
Congestion - more traffic in our road.
Excess speed near child's park
Loose parking space
Natural woodland & wildlife will be affected.
School lane - accessibility / kids safety
Child got hit by car outside School already.
Visibility is Limited.
Too close to the park / light blocking
66
We will need Zebra crossings - extra kids.
Cars parked on junctions is already an issue.

Question 47
PE1 - Access from this site onto main road A268 is both dangerous and restricted
Quantity of properties could cause problems with sewage and drainage as system seems overloaded for scale of pipes – needs updating
PE3 - Possible problems with PFR / flooding / field runoff
Additional Note
Concern over main drainage should be given to all developments and also to the village houses between Flackey Ash and Kitchenour Lane
Sewerage is very poor
Flooding from field runoff – cannot cope in bad weather

Question 1
The Strategic Spatial Objectives should be honestly adhered to in the formulating of the plan. In particular, Point 11 states Deliver sustainable development having regard to local context and character. There are clear instances in the approach towards Peasmarsh for example, where this principle is clearly breached. The proposals for Peasmarsh will change the character of the village and the planning team are now clearly regarding the context of Peasmarsh as a suburb of Rye rather than the rural village it is.
The Objectives also do not include any mention of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, now called the High Weald National Landscape. As such they are going against the NPPF, which they are not allowed to do. The Objective of preserving the AONB/National Landscape should be added. This would clearly set out the context in which Chapter 6.2 can be read. Question 5
Regarding Infrastructure needs, my initial comments relate solely to Utility and Energy with specific reference to the Peasmarsh area, which are the fundamental pre‑requisites for any acceptable development.
The Peasmarsh Neighbourhood Development Plan (PNDP), accepted by Rother DC in April 2024 after an Inspection and local Referendum, highlighted in great detail the deficiencies of these services in Peasmarsh.
The sewer system is grossly inadequate. The combined drain arrangement, combining storm water with sewage, taken together with the wet conditions, ensures not only flooding but the eruption into the road of raw sewage in particularly wet times. This is confirmed by many photos in the Appendices to the PNDP.
Southern Water have admitted that the Sewage Pumping Station is at the limit of its capacity. Any additional building of any consequence will increase run‑off and cause further deterioration in this problem and make life particularly unpleasant and insanitary.
Old houses by the main road have wells that never run dry and complicated drainage arrangements have been installed over the years in efforts to reduce flooding, but have never succeeded.
Any post holes fill immediately with water. A photograph shows a hole dug to remove a fruit frame post from my garden which backs onto Tanyard field. This high water‑table problem has been known for many years but no remedies have ever been proposed or undertaken.
Both power and water supply are clearly inadequate for the existing housing stock. In recent times alone, there have been many instances of power or water failure. Internet service also regularly fails.
It is irresponsible to consider any further development without addressing these issues first.
The village school is oversubscribed and cannot handle additional children the developments would generate. Question 6
The Development Option SDO13 A21 Corridor Growth seems sensible and should indeed be pursued.
SDO14 filling strategic gaps should proceed as well, and the reasons for abandoning it do not align with achieving development targets.
The effect is to force unreasonable development targets onto areas such as ours which are unsuitable for large‑scale developments and are technically totally unsuitable. Question 13
The proposed vision and development strategy for the Eastern Settlements Cluster seems totally wrong. It has all the hallmarks of a paper exercise, conducted from a desk and ignoring real life.
Allocation of new homes to Peasmarsh is disproportionate to the size of the village and would increase the population by 15–20 percent, changing its character.
The number of new homes exceeds that of larger villages, despite clear geographical limitations.
Expecting Peasmarsh to take 20 percent of additional homes is unbalanced and appears to push Peasmarsh into becoming a dormitory suburb of Rye.
The commercial centres in the village are all on one site and part of one enterprise, exposed to commercial pressures.
Recent democratic consultations show the village wants small‑scale or infill development, not large‑scale proposals.
Peasmarsh already has more social and low‑cost housing than many local villages.
Concerns are raised about placing people from outside the area, as occurred in The Maltings development. Question 47
Major objections to PE3 Tanyard Field and PE5 Malthouse Business Park.
PE3 Tanyard Field
The site is inaccurately described as new, despite over 40 years of attempts by the landowner to obtain planning permission, including appeals.
The site was investigated and rejected during preparation of the PNDP, endorsed by referendum and accepted by Rother DC.
Reasons for unsuitability include:

Located in AONB/High Weald National Landscape; development would damage character.
Visual amenity impact on many village homes.
Loss of amenity, privacy, quiet enjoyment.
Encourages further unsuitable applications.
The suggestion of 15 dwellings is unrealistic and would lead to larger future proposals, historically up to 100 homes.
Impact on listed buildings.
A historic right of way would be damaged.
Steep slope downhill increases drainage problems.
Field full of springs and heavy clay soil causing impermeable surfaces and severe run‑off.
Overloads main combined drain.
Surface water run‑off is a major longstanding issue in the village.
Unsafe access points onto School Lane and Main Street.
Traffic increases incompatible with environmental policy.
Infrastructure already inadequate.
Site supports multiple species, including protected wildlife such as bats, lizards, frogs, toads, hedgehogs, tawny owls, woodpeckers, and other protected species.

PE5 - Malthouse Business Park
This small industrial and commercial area is vital to local employment.
Its loss would deter small businesses and remove opportunities for local residents to work in the village.

The objectives do not include the area of outstanding beauty
People might assume the change of name is entirely because the depredation of a landscape sounds so much more inoffensive than destroying natural beauty, but changing the name does not make it any less beautiful or worthy of preservation
The Peasmarsh Neighbourhood Development Plan, accepted by Rother DC in April 2024 after inspection and local referendum, highlighted in great detail the deficiencies of these services in Peasmarsh.
Question 5
The sewer system is inadequate, combining storm water with sewage, together with wet conditions causes flooding and eruption into the road of sewage particularly during wet times
Our houses near the main road have wells that never dry out with complicated drain arrangements installed over the years to reduce flooding
Holes being dug fill immediately with water, no remedies have ever been undertaken
Power and water supply are inadequate for existing houses
I feel it would be foolish to consider further development within the village
The village school is oversubscribed with no facility to manage large numbers of additional children.
Question 6
Two local doctors surgeries (Rye, Northiam) are taking on no further patients, so where will medical treatment be obtained
The development option SDO13 A21 Corridor Growth seems sensible and should be pursued
SDO14 filling strategic gaps should proceed as well, though reasons given for abandoning it do not align with achievement of development targets the plan defines
Many of these reasons are well meant, but the effect is to force development targets into areas which are technically unsuitable

Question 13
The allocation of new homes to Peasmarsh is out of proportion to the existing size of the village
Proposals would increase the population by 15–20 percent, completely changing the character of the village
Why should our village in the AONB / High Weald National Landscape bear an increase twice that of the country as a whole
The number of new homes allocated to Peasmarsh is in excess of that for any other village
Expecting Peasmarsh to take 20 percent of additional homes is clearly unbalanced
The wishes of the village clearly expressed developments should be small scale

Question 47
Peasmarsh has an undulating park‑like appearance and is visible from many locations round the village
Development would have a catastrophic impact on the rural character of the area
The field slopes very steeply downwards towards the north making it totally unsuitable
The existing neighbour drives are adjacent to this access; we witness numerous near misses with people trying to get onto the main road
I feel the infrastructure around the site is inadequate for further housing
Also the drains are unable to cope now, let alone with extra housing

Question 1
The Strategic Spatial Objectives should be adhered to, having regard to local context and character. The proposals for Peasmarsh will materially change the character of the village.

Question 5
The sewer system is inadequate as there are regular occurrences of flooding and raw sewage erupting into the road. Southern Water have stated that the Sewage Pumping Station is at its capacity. Further housing will only exacerbate this. There are also regular power cuts.

Question 6
The Development Option SDO13 should be pursued.

Question 13
The proposed vision and development strategy seems wrong. The allocation of new homes to Peasmarsh is out of proportion to the existing village and its capacity to absorb additional development.

Question 47
I object to the PE3 Tanyard Field development. The landowner has sought planning permission for this site for over 40 years and the reasons for objection still apply. It is unsuitable for development as it is located in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty / High Weald National Landscape. The site’s drainage is inadequate, steeply sloping, and surface water run‑off is a major problem throughout the village.

Question 47
The NPPF’s intention is for the planning system to be plan led therefore local plans need to be accurate
Rother District Council need to address social and environmental issues in Peasmarsh rather than ignore them
UKPN –
This area has a huge issue with power outages due to lack of investment in Peasmarsh and overhead power lines
Unfortunately the landowners don’t maintain the trees and every winter the area is hit with constant power cuts
This is evidenced by 2 letters of complaint to UKPN and MPs (forwarded by Gmail)
Until you can guarantee a regular power supply it’s crazy to contemplate more houses
BT –
Impossible to get a working phone line in parts of Peasmarsh
This is again caused by lack of infrastructure and poor maintenance of trees

SOUTH EAST WATER –
Water supply regularly out or comes through dirty and cloudy
FLOOD RISK –
The Strategic Spatial Objectives are reduce flood risk from all sources
Respond to housing crisis
There is no doubt a housing crisis and Peasmarsh could supply homes for local people, but for Rother to claim they are responding to the crisis isn’t accurate
In the case of our own recent planning application which was overturned on appeal, they are actively ignoring suitable houses and existing stock
Appeal APP/U1430/W/25/3361201
RR/2024/1397/P
Regarding the flood risk in Peasmarsh, this has been ongoing and ignored for far too long


Flooding & Drainage (further text)
The surface water after heavy rainfall is a problem
The drains are inadequate and badly maintained
The land drains and holding pits aren’t checked and have been failing for some time
The lower areas of the village have issues with sewage and excess water
Jempson’s supermarket was publicised recently due to the roundabout flooding


Infrastructure / Transport
Poor or non‑existent bus service forces everyone to rely on motor vehicles
My local dentist is in Ashford and hospital visits in Canterbury and Hastings
To get a reasonably priced food shop you are forced to drive to Tenterden or Hastings
The train service at Rye is poor and often cancelled
The trains don’t match up with the fast link into London and I’m often having to collect people from Ashford
Making a motor vehicle essential in Peasmarsh

Question 47
PE3 Tanyard Field
Maltings Business Park
Woodlands are protected
Loss of light with height of the development
Houses already there being overlooked
Wildlife displacement
I am not against some building being done in the village
It’s the quantity, not being for locals and infrastructure/amenities need to be improved first

Question 1
Access unsafe coming onto main road on brow of hill
Local doctors, dentists already at capacity
Services – water – old pipes won’t cope with extra demands
Bus routes for village being cut

Question 5
The infrastructure needs updating and maintained
Pumping station is out of date and poorly maintained
I have worries about supplies – water, burst pipes, power cuts, loss of internet and phone coverage
The repair to my food side stop‑cock took nearly months to be done
My neighbours have had sewage in their gardens
The new house built not long ago had flooding
Congestion in the roads from the main road to the Maltings – parking bad already
If they build on the business park it will get worse
When pavilion used or the field (football) it can be difficult to get to the main road
Parking in front of business park should be for pavilion and field use
The damage to the roads and pavements has not been fixed since the last lot of buildings
I strongly object to the number of flats being proposed

Question 6
School Lane vehicle access restricted already
Cars park half on the pavement
Access for new builds will add to an already bad problem
Road not wide enough – narrows and hill
Pressure on the school and safety for children

Question 47 (second block)
Proposed planning for PE3 Tanyard Field and PE5 Malthouse Business Park
Why take away small local businesses – upping the rent to move makes it impossible to survive
Loss of parking for community events on recreation ground
PE3 – loss of land used by local farmer for grazing
Jempsons closed on a Sunday which has all of the amenities, pharmacy, post office
Conway come out for SE Water to pump water to prevent flooding in horses/garden of Main Street
Bus times are not workable
I drive at the moment, but would not be able to use public transport for appointments etc.
PE4 – Access not good
Need more affordable homes, not 4 and 5 bed homes
Traffic calming needed

Question 47
PE3 Tanyard Field
Maltings Business Park
Woodlands are protected
Loss of light with height of the development
Houses already there being overlooked
Wildlife displacement
I am not against some building being done in the village
It’s the quantity, not being for locals and infrastructure/amenities need to be improved first

Question 1
Access unsafe coming onto main road on brow of hill
Local doctors, dentists already at capacity
Services – water – old pipes won’t cope with extra demands
Bus routes for village being cut

Question 5
The infrastructure needs updating and maintained
Pumping station is out of date and poorly maintained
I have worries about supplies – water, burst pipes, power cuts, loss of internet and phone coverage
The repair to my food side stop‑cock took nearly months to be done
My neighbours have had sewage in their gardens
The new house built not long ago had flooding
Congestion in the roads from the main road to the Maltings – parking bad already
If they build on the business park it will get worse
When pavilion used or the field (football) it can be difficult to get to the main road
Parking in front of business park should be for pavilion and field use
The damage to the roads and pavements has not been fixed since the last lot of buildings
I strongly object to the number of flats being proposed

Question 6
School Lane vehicle access restricted already
Cars park half on the pavement
Access for new builds will add to an already bad problem
Road not wide enough – narrows and hill
Pressure on the school and safety for children

Question 47 (second block)
Proposed planning for PE3 Tanyard Field and PE5 Malthouse Business Park
Why take away small local businesses – upping the rent to move makes it impossible to survive
Loss of parking for community events on recreation ground
PE3 – loss of land used by local farmer for grazing
Jempsons closed on a Sunday which has all of the amenities, pharmacy, post office
Conway come out for SE Water to pump water to prevent flooding in horses/garden of Main Street
Bus times are not workable
I drive at the moment, but would not be able to use public transport for appointments etc.
PE4 – Access not good
Need more affordable homes, not 4 and 5 bed homes
Traffic calming needed

Question 47
PE3 Tanyard Field
Maltings Business Park
Woodlands are protected
Loss of light with height of the development
Houses already there being overlooked
Wildlife displacement
I am not against some building being done in the village
It’s the quantity, not being for locals and infrastructure/amenities need to be improved first

Question 1
Access unsafe coming onto main road on brow of hill
Local doctors, dentists already at capacity
Services – water – old pipes won’t cope with extra demands
Bus routes for village being cut

Question 5
The infrastructure needs updating and maintained
Pumping station is out of date and poorly maintained
I have worries about supplies – water, burst pipes, power cuts, loss of internet and phone coverage
The repair to my food side stop‑cock took nearly months to be done
My neighbours have had sewage in their gardens
The new house built not long ago had flooding
Congestion in the roads from the main road to the Maltings – parking bad already
If they build on the business park it will get worse
When pavilion used or the field (football) it can be difficult to get to the main road
Parking in front of business park should be for pavilion and field use
The damage to the roads and pavements has not been fixed since the last lot of buildings
I strongly object to the number of flats being proposed

Question 6
School Lane vehicle access restricted already
Cars park half on the pavement
Access for new builds will add to an already bad problem
Road not wide enough – narrows and hill
Pressure on the school and safety for children

Question 47 (second block)
Proposed planning for PE3 Tanyard Field and PE5 Malthouse Business Park
Why take away small local businesses – upping the rent to move makes it impossible to survive
Loss of parking for community events on recreation ground
PE3 – loss of land used by local farmer for grazing
Jempsons closed on a Sunday which has all of the amenities, pharmacy, post office
Conway come out for SE Water to pump water to prevent flooding in horses/garden of Main Street
Bus times are not workable
I drive at the moment, but would not be able to use public transport for appointments etc.
PE4 – Access not good
Need more affordable homes, not 4 and 5 bed homes
Traffic calming needed

Question 5
They will be taking away green belt land which will mean more local flooding
The sewage system will not cope with that many houses as it has not been upgraded
We have not another dentist or doctors to cope with more people and not another school

Question 6
Peasmarsh is a village not a town

Question 47
PE5 Malthouse Business Park planning
The road to the Maltings is already congested with cars because people from Main Road use it for parking
The car park is for people that use the football field which is hired out for people to use

Question 47
We also have a lot of football matches played which can also cause congestion with parking
So if flats are built on this land it is going to add more congestion to the road leading to the Maltings and The Old Hop Gardens

PART 2 CHAPTER 4 - WE ALREAD HAVE REGULAR WATER SUPPLY ISSUES + FLOODI NG DUE TO POOR
DRAINAGE. POWER is ALSO AN ISSUE THE BUS SERVICES LIMITED - AND RECENTLY REDUCED NO MEDICAL) DENTAL FACILITY IN NEAR AREA -LET ALONE To COPE WITH MORE.

PART 3 CHAPTER 7, 47, PE1-PE5 - SPEED ON MAIN STREET Though 30 IS SELDOM ADHERED TO. SO JUNCTION ON BROW OF HILL AN BENDS IS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO CLAPPEN

NOT MUCH FACILTY FOR YOUNGER GENERATION, AN IFLUX COULD MAKE ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR IN VILLAGE MUCH MORE LIKELY.

Qu.I Upon reading the original local development plans, the proposed document did mention anything about the following: PE2 was added and not specified. PE4 and PE5 were not included in the initial village development plans.

Qu 5 The Drainage and sewage system in peasmarsh area have become a problem over the years. They are badly outdated from a capacity and age point of view. We have lived in peasmarsh for 4 years and each year have seen raw sewage jetting up and overflowing through the drains and into the roads. This not only presents a health risk but proves there are problems with the drainage and sewage systems in place currently. The report stating that the drainage was adequate and there was no flood risk is wrong! I feel this has not been looked at properly from a development point of view. Our neighbours have had issues with sewage flowing back into their homes causing flooding. Peasmarsh's geography puts us low in comparison to the water table and this does not help matters. Recent rain falls are getting heavier causing more surface water again adding more issues to the drainage.

Qu.5 Utilities - gigaclear super fast fiber broadband is not available to all due to outdated infrastructure. Only recently we had a 4 day outage causing lots of issues with work and home life.5 Parking in the Maltings area is inadequate - people park wherever they can blocking access to driveways, parking over dropped kerbs, parking on the grass verges damaging the pathways and making it dangerous and hazardous to pedestrians in particular children. People drive too fast up to where PE5 is proposed as there are no traffic calming solutions in force. They also park on the junction making it very difficult to see when driving and causing dangerous conditions. Additional houses on the PE5 proposed site would only make things worse. If 6 houses are built there would be a minimum further 6 vehicles if not more being majority households have 2 vehicles. This will only add to the ongoing over crowded roads. PE5 includes a community car park which locals and the business unit occupants use constantly. The recreation ground, play park and football pavilion are used by so many people, locals and people from outside the village, removing the car park leaves no where other than the already congested road to park.

An influx of additional vehicles will also present an issue for emergency services causing access problems in emergency situations. In recent years we ourselves have had an ambulance out twice for our young children where they had no option but to block the road to help us and cars were double parked!!
We have a residential home on our road also and the frequently have emergency services out to them which again they have no option but to block the roads caused but over congested roads.

Increased volume of vehicles will make the roads in peasmarsh in particular The Maltings worse then they currently are. The state of the roads are in need of immediate attention which we have been told by the council 'is not a priority' !!??

Peasmarsh's nearest doctor's surgery is in Rye. When we moved to peasmarsh, Northiam surgery told us that we are out of their catchment so that leaves Rye to take on an additional influx of patients with all the new houses proposed. Public transport services are not frequent which will make simple tasks like doctors appointments problematic.

Qu. 5 Will the aesthetic of all the houses proposed be in keeping with the surrounding area?. There currently are no flats in the Maltings like they proposed in PE5 and in the immediate vicinity which would be unsightly and out of character to the rest of the surrounding area. I have concerns that PE5 will directly overlook my garden and my neighbours. This will affect my privacy as we are already overlooked by the houses situated at the front of our house. Losing basic privacy will have a direct impact on mental health and this is very important to avoid this.

Public transport needs a big boost if new houses are to be built as we are very remote and more and more people rely on public transport to get about. If this becomes an issue due to frequent services then there will be lots of issues regarding basic daily needs.

Qu.6 Work, shopping, appointments etc. Concern over the size of the primary school and capacity issues with an influx of families moving to the village.

Access to the school is extremely bad for vehicles as it is a narrow road and increasing the volume of houses would in turn increase the volume of pedestrian traffic vehicular traffic so this needs to be considered very carefully and clearly.

The crossing on main street needs attention too as this is used every day by parents talking children to school. The road is supposed to be 30mph but speeding traffic is a daily problem and very dangerous. More houses, more problems, better solutions required like zebra crossing of traffic calming.

Qu. 13 The volume of housing proposed in proportion to the size of the village is unfair. While development is required to a degree, this many houses is far too many for such a small village. The combined sites from PEI to PE5 equate to almost doubling the size of the village and in doing so without updating infrastructure is not right and will again cause issues later down the line.

Qu. 47
PE5 is within 15 meters of protected ancient woodland. Building here would be detrimental to the environment. The woodland has precious wildlife and heritage being ancient and for that reason I feel it is wrong to develop. Wildlife will be displaced no matter how good measures are taken. What green space we have will be lost too with potential trees and grass areas being dug up. Open green space has a significant lift to mental well being for people in the area and adding more buildings will do no good to mental health.

We will also lose our community grit bin and this poses a health and safety risk. If we can't gain easy access to this big, then injuries may occur in icy and snowy conditions. The existing car park in the PE5 area is used daily by so many, taking this away for development is just ridiculous. We have a local recreation ground where people won't be able to park and gain access to the play area and surrounding field. This takes away a basic right to enjoy a designated open green space causing potential distress. Overall I strongly object to PE5 and think this is not a suitable option!

Qu.67 Overall I strongly object to PE5 and think this is not a suitable option!